R.A.Danny:Not to make this a gun argument (I know, too late) but it is the very mindset that rabidly encroaches on what many may call their Second Amendment Rights that feels that citizens really have no rights whatsoever.

Honestly, did we ever? I was listening to some George Carlin this morning and he simply brought up the internment of Japanese-AMERICANS. Plenty of other obvious examples (slavery, lack of woman's suffrage, Alien and Sedition Acts, Andrew Jackson's presidency, the PATRIOT Act, etc etc etc).

Nem Wan:NYPD has something like 35,000 officers. That's bigger than the population of a lot of small towns. There should be an independent 50-member force that arrests NYPD officers for violating people's rights.

There's about, oh, gee, thousands of different objects someone walking down the street could have on them, or in a bag hanging on their shoulder, that might set this stupid thing off. Unless it can definitively tell what is a gun and what isn't (and I'm guessing it can't) that's pretty stupid.

TheJoe03:Honestly, did we ever? I was listening to some George Carlin this morning and he simply brought up the internment of Japanese-AMERICANS. Plenty of other obvious examples (slavery, lack of woman's suffrage, Alien and Sedition Acts, Andrew Jackson's presidency, the PATRIOT Act, etc etc etc).

It's sad isn't it? I know no one is gonna use their AR15 to "Water the tree of democracy" or any of that bullshiat, but a lot of gun enthusiasts do see their Second Amendment rights as a canary in a coal mine. Yeah, there are some nuts out there, but can it be said that they have no reason do resent what is and has gone on? The sickening authoritarian mindset is probably the least "American" value that one can come up with.

topcon:There's about, oh, gee, thousands of different objects someone walking down the street could have on them, or in a bag hanging on their shoulder, that might set this stupid thing off. Unless it can definitively tell what is a gun and what isn't (and I'm guessing it can't) that's pretty stupid.

Rincewind53:WalkingCarpet: In other news, false arrests and harassment of innocent civilians to increase by a brazillion percent.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that warrantless use of thermal imaging cameras when used to see if a house is emitting too much heat (indicating a grow operation) is a 4th Amendment violation. Does the NYPD really think the warrantless use of terahertz scanning technology to detect metal items hidden in people's clothing is constitutional?

'm with you on this one, the bright line for what constitutes a search has always been "in plain view" so using magnifying optics to peer into a place is okay since you could already see what was thee and the person only had to draw a curtain to protect their privacy. However using microphones or other devices to hear what you otherwise could not hear is not okay because the person, in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, can unwittinglyhave that privacy breached. That's the logic they applied to the use of thermal scanners, seeing into the IR is not "plain" sight, so no go without a warrant.

This has GOT to fall into the same category, even with the reduced expectation of privacy that applies while in public. I assume the NYPD will claim they only use this device when they already have the level of "reasonable suspicion" that would allow them to do a Terry stop, but we've seen how wantonly they abuse that already, so I think the courts will view this with a high degree of suspicion

Ohlookabutterfly:King Something: King Something: AbbeySomeone: What are the health risks associated with this type of device?

Greatly increased risk of Sudden Non-White Death Syndrome, for one.

And for another, press releases that read something like this:"The device indicated that the subject may have been carrying a high-power firearm. The risk to our officers was too great, so they had to eliminate the perceived threat before it could become a real threat."whenever the NYPD puts a litterer or a jaywalker down like a rabid dog.

Just realized a third risk:

Combining the first two risks with the NYPD's extreme hatred of Occupiers:"The scanners indicated that several protesters may have been carrying concealed firearms and their behavior indicated they were about to brandish their weapons and open fire. Our officers' orders were to maintain the peace at the protests and defend themselves with any amount of force they deemed necessary, including deadly force; they were not sent in as an execution squad or to quell a civilian uprising of people protesting against the NYPD's most generous donors, our officers were just following orders.

"The fact that well over 95% of the dozens of persons killed in the crossfire and 85% of the thousands arrested were black or Hispanic is purely coincidental; there was a white male among the deceased and not all white arrestees were released without charges, so the NAACP, the ACLU and other civil rights groups claiming this was a case of ethnic cleansing are the real racists."

Thats there is a whole lot of "all whites are racists" butthurt, man. Don't you know the three most beautiful words in the english language are "I forgive you"? Stop perpetuating that ridiculous victim mindset and get on with your life.

I was going for the "The NYPD are a bunch of racist assholes" angle. If you doubt my word, look up Amadou Diallo, Abner Louima or Sean Bell.

Or the cop who was driving drunk and ran over and killed a pregnant Hispanic woman, her two kids and her unborn child. He got convicted on all counts but his sentences were served concurrently instead of consecutively, and he was eligible for parole about halfway through his sentence; had the roles been reversed and the pregnant Hispanic woman run over the cop while driving drunk, she would have long since been executed.

Rincewind53:WalkingCarpet: In other news, false arrests and harassment of innocent civilians to increase by a brazillion percent.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that warrantless use of thermal imaging cameras when used to see if a house is emitting too much heat (indicating a grow operation) is a 4th Amendment violation. Does the NYPD really think the warrantless use of terahertz scanning technology to detect metal items hidden in people's clothing is constitutional?

The DAY they set one up near MY house is the day I file the lawsuit for health risks.

It's one thing to be scanned once and a while. It's another thing to have the device parked outside your home or business.

Nem Wan:NYPD has something like 35,000 officers. That's bigger than the population of a lot of small towns. There should be an independent 50-member force that arrests NYPD officers for violating people's rights.

Meh. I just hope it doesn't detect my penis. I have to wrap it in tinfoil or the aliens can control it and ever since the accident it's shaped kind of like a gun. I guess it won't really be a problem unless there is an assault weapon ban.

It's interesting that the gun's rights people are up in arms about the gun's rights issue and not the unreasonable search issue which has been plaguing NYC for a while now. The biggest problem I see with this is that, like all police intervention, it can be enforced selectively. If this was searching every person the car drove past with computer object ID and a little alarm and a log reference and an automatic search of every individual I'd be less concerned than how it will probably be used. Hell, even the alarm version is likely to be driven in certain neighborhoods more than others. As for the unreasonable search issue, if it's a passive scanner, you have to decide if you think that's an invasion of the person or not. If you see someone with an illegal object, you are allowed to confront them. What if you see them because you are wearing prescription glasses? How spotting them down the beach with binoculars? A traffic camera? Night vision glasses (but they are on a public street), hell, or just because they are under a streetlight (put there no doubt to enhance the ability to see).

That said, even although this registers as 'meh' on my radar, I don't think policy like this should be set at a police department level. It should be legislated. We have a 'try it and see if the courts overturn it' policy, which doesn't serve the public well.

redmid17:Nem Wan: NYPD has something like 35,000 officers. That's bigger than the population of a lot of small towns. There should be an independent 50-member force that arrests NYPD officers for violating people's rights.

Do you really think NYC can afford all that overtime?

Heh, no they can't. Bloomberg is gonna leave NYC over a $100 Billion, yes BILLION, in debt when he leaves office. New Yorkers sure know how to pick winners as their reps. Link

R.A.Danny:It's sad isn't it? I know no one is gonna use their AR15 to "Water the tree of democracy" or any of that bullshiat, but a lot of gun enthusiasts do see their Second Amendment rights as a canary in a coal mine. Yeah, there are some nuts out there, but can it be said that they have no reason do resent what is and has gone on? The sickening authoritarian mindset is probably the least "American" value that one can come up with.

Ivo Shandor:Weaver95: that's ok, I wasn't using my freedom anyways. I wonder if you can sterilize people with this thing? crank it up, zap sperm from 10 meters out and go cruising around the streets with it.

It appears to be a passive device, like a thermal imaging camera but looking at a different section of the electromagnetic spectrum. The privacy concerns are valid, but the only health risk is an indirect one from high-velocity lead poisoning.

You could in effect blind them by radiating in the same band in which they are looking.

Also, wet clothes would defeat this system, as would clothing made out of metal fibers like lamé.

Plus, you could introduce a *HUGE* number of false positives by simply arranging metal-containing articles like a cellphone and a pen or small flashlight into a "gun like" configuration,

Another thing to consider is that the waves used can penetrate plastics. A gun like a Glock, without the magazine inserted into it, isn't going to look like a gun, just a rectangular blob that could be any number of legal objects.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that warrantless use of thermal imaging cameras when used to see if a house is emitting too much heat (indicating a grow operation) is a 4th Amendment violation. Does the NYPD really think the warrantless use of terahertz scanning technology to detect metal items hidden in people's clothing is constitutional?

Judging by some of the recent law passed, I don't think the NYPD or NY state/city government care all that much what the constitution says.

Weaver95:Ivo Shandor: Weaver95: that's ok, I wasn't using my freedom anyways. I wonder if you can sterilize people with this thing? crank it up, zap sperm from 10 meters out and go cruising around the streets with it.

It appears to be a passive device, like a thermal imaging camera but looking at a different section of the electromagnetic spectrum. The privacy concerns are valid, but the only health risk is an indirect one from high-velocity lead poisoning.

well that takes all the fun out of it. I wonder if there's a way to manufacture underwear that'd scramble the scanner?

dittybopper:"Illegal guns may be a problem, but that doesn't give you carte blanche to run roughshod over the Constitution. You still have to follow the rules."

redmid17:You're not very good at this whole constitution thing are you?

I didn't say a word in support of this did I? Or against the constitution?

It's just a hard argument. People want to push off the burden of gun crime onto "aaaah illegal handguns in the cities hurbleflerb" but there's never a suggestion on how that can get better. I'm not convinced that passively scanning everyone is the right way to go, but here we are.

Why not? Every part of a fully functioning handgun can be made from plastic, tho Federal law requires a minimum magnetic metal content (about 3 ounces, iirc). The real question is, will guns like that get more popular, and would they defeat this detection capability? I was just posting a snarky Fark meme with my 3, 2, 1 crack, but ultimately it will be an interesting question.

I also bet there are lots of easy ways to defeat the scanner without going to those extremes.

I've never been to New York (although I hope to visit next fall sometime just to check it out), but it's very interesting to me reading the type of relationship the NYPD has with the public - at least how it is reported in the media. Things seem calmer up here in the frozen wastelands.

Anecdotal example: A few months ago I wasn't paying attention to my speed and got pulled over by the Highway Patrol. (dumb, I know) Trooper came up to my window to get my license/insurance and I told him I was carrying a concealed weapon - as required by law.

He thanked me for telling him, took my information back to his car, did...whatever they do, then advised me to slow it down and be on my way. No dramatics, no roadside frisking, no putting me in handcuffs "for safety", nothing.

/I still kept my hands well away from that side of my coat though. Didn't want any misunderstandings.

sheep snorter:Sales of a new product to skyrocket. Its a piece of metal in a gun shape. Used to harass the fark out of the police scanners and the more skilled individuals can place it into unsuspecting peoples pockets or purses.

/Oh the bump and stuff(opposite of the bump and pull) on the subway is going to be that much more fun.